WEEK 8 · Sun, Nov 1, 2:25 PM CST

New England Patriots @ Miami Dolphins

9 qualified model plays · 5 modeled lines did not qualify · 5-4-0
← Back to Week 8
MODEL OVERVIEW

What the board is seeing

Qualified plays 9 Published sides that cleared the current model thresholds.
Avg model win 71.1% Average estimated win probability across this game's qualified plays.
Avg no-vig edge +18.7% Model probability minus the market's no-vig implied probability.
Avg model-implied EV +27.8% Average modeled return using the published side price.

Projection gap is the raw difference between PDR's projection and the sportsbook line. No-vig edge is the probability advantage after removing sportsbook hold. They answer different questions.

How the model works →
QUALIFIED PLAYS

Game prop board

Ranked by the frozen published model board.

#1 MODEL PLAY

Jaylen Wright

Rushing yards
LOSS
OVER 13.5
fanduel -113
Projection 51.4
Proj. gap +37.9
Model win 85.3%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +35.3%
Model-implied EV +60.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 51.4 is 37.9 above the 13.5 line.
Model win probability 85.3% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +35.3% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 85.3% model win, +35.3% no-vig edge, and +60.8% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 5 rushing yards
#2 MODEL PLAY

Malik Willis

Passing yards
LOSS
UNDER 178.5
fanduel -113
Projection 117.6
Proj. gap -60.9
Model win 78.7%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +28.7%
Model-implied EV +48.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 117.6 is 60.9 below the 178.5 line.
Model win probability 78.7% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +28.7% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 78.7% model win, +28.7% no-vig edge, and +48.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 211 passing yards
#3 MODEL PLAY

Hunter Henry

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 4.5
fanduel -160
Projection 3.9
Proj. gap -0.6
Model win 73.4%
No-vig market 57.5%
No-vig edge +15.9%
Model-implied EV +19.3%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.9 is 0.6 below the 4.5 line.
Model win probability 73.4% vs 57.5% no-vig market probability creates a +15.9% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 73.4% model win, +15.9% no-vig edge, and +19.3% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 3 receptions
#4 MODEL PLAY

Greg Dulcich

Receptions
LOSS
UNDER 3.5
fanduel -154
Projection 2.9
Proj. gap -0.6
Model win 72.7%
No-vig market 56.7%
No-vig edge +16.0%
Model-implied EV +19.8%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 2.9 is 0.6 below the 3.5 line.
Model win probability 72.7% vs 56.7% no-vig market probability creates a +16.0% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 72.7% model win, +16.0% no-vig edge, and +19.8% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 4 receptions
#5 MODEL PLAY

Rhamondre Stevenson

Receptions
WIN
UNDER 3.5
fanduel -154
Projection 3.0
Proj. gap -0.5
Model win 71.6%
No-vig market 56.7%
No-vig edge +14.9%
Model-implied EV +18.1%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 3.0 is 0.5 below the 3.5 line.
Model win probability 71.6% vs 56.7% no-vig market probability creates a +14.9% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 71.6% model win, +14.9% no-vig edge, and +18.1% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 3 receptions
#6 MODEL PLAY

Hunter Henry

Receiving yards
WIN
UNDER 45.5
fanduel -113
Projection 44.1
Proj. gap -1.4
Model win 68.2%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +18.2%
Model-implied EV +28.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 44.1 is 1.4 below the 45.5 line.
Model win probability 68.2% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +18.2% edge.
Qualified with 2154 residual samples, 68.2% model win, +18.2% no-vig edge, and +28.6% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 2154
Final: 30 receiving yards
#7 MODEL PLAY

Malik Willis

Rushing yards
WIN
UNDER 33.5
fanduel -113
Projection 30.3
Proj. gap -3.2
Model win 66.1%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +16.1%
Model-implied EV +24.6%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 30.3 is 3.2 below the 33.5 line.
Model win probability 66.1% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +16.1% edge.
Qualified with 796 residual samples, 66.1% model win, +16.1% no-vig edge, and +24.6% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 796
Final: 2 rushing yards
#8 MODEL PLAY

Drake Maye

Passing TDs
WIN
OVER 1.5
fanduel -118
Projection 2.1
Proj. gap +0.6
Model win 64.9%
No-vig market 50.8%
No-vig edge +14.1%
Model-implied EV +19.9%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 2.1 is 0.6 above the 1.5 line.
Model win probability 64.9% vs 50.8% no-vig market probability creates a +14.1% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 64.9% model win, +14.1% no-vig edge, and +19.9% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 2 passing TDs
#9 MODEL PLAY

Drake Maye

Passing yards
LOSS
OVER 239.5
fanduel -113
Projection 263.0
Proj. gap +23.5
Model win 58.7%
No-vig market 50.0%
No-vig edge +8.7%
Model-implied EV +10.7%
WHY THIS PLAY
Projection 263.0 is 23.5 above the 239.5 line.
Model win probability 58.7% vs 50.0% no-vig market probability creates a +8.7% edge.
Qualified with 516 residual samples, 58.7% model win, +8.7% no-vig edge, and +10.7% model-implied EV; publication floors are 500 samples, 57.5% win, +5.0% edge, and +5.0% EV.
Historical residual sample: 516
Final: 199 passing yards
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Other lines PDR reviewed

Context only. These are not published recommendations and are not graded.

MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Drake Maye

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 23.5
fanduel -113
Projection29.2
Proj. gap+5.7
Model win43.3%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-6.7%
Model-implied EV-18.3%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Greg Dulcich

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 29.5
fanduel -113
Projection36.7
Proj. gap+7.2
Model win43.1%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-6.9%
Model-implied EV-18.8%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Malik Willis

Passing TDs
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 0.5
fanduel -165
Projection0.7
Proj. gap+0.2
Model win55.2%
No-vig market58.5%
No-vig edge-3.2%
Model-implied EV-11.3%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 516
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Rhamondre Stevenson

Rushing yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 58.5
fanduel -113
Projection66.2
Proj. gap+7.7
Model win45.6%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-4.4%
Model-implied EV-14.0%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 796
MODELED - DID NOT QUALIFY

Rhamondre Stevenson

Receiving yards
Did not qualify
Model side: OVER 24.5
fanduel -113
Projection29.6
Proj. gap+5.1
Model win40.1%
No-vig market50.0%
No-vig edge-9.9%
Model-implied EV-24.5%
Why it did not qualify: Model win probability did not clear the publication floor.
Historical residual sample: 2154
PDR is part of The Buffet. Turn your sports takes into challenges with friends at Buffet Bets →